If you want to ignore parts of the Bible you can. That takes the fun out of it. Scholars for over a 1000 years have put alot of effort into figuring out which books are authentic and from God. The rest is up to you. Trust whichever scholars you want, believe whatever your heart tells you to. Be a lot sceptical.

Takes the fun out of it? I love this attitude from a Christian. Meh, whatever, believe whatever you want from it, it's okay. Who cares that it contradicts itself and per the bible if you don't get things, right you're damned. And yes, much effort was put into which books were what God "really" meant. And the ones that were chosen have no more evidence of that than those which weren't. A lot of useless effort parsing between competing myths doesn't mean that any of them are right.

Quote

But if you ask the right questions, you'll find some interesting answers.

oh, the "right" questions. Silly me, I wasn't asking the right questions or completing the right spells to get the "right" answers.

Quote

When I was a kid and first realized that not all Pastors and Christians agreed on issues like Baptism, worship, tithes, Catholic doctrine, authority of the Bible etc. I started with a foundation: "I'm going to believe this Bible is true until someone proves it otherwise."

and you've intentionally ignored everything that demonstrates that it is false. 30 years later i'm still convinced its true.[/quote] Yep, I can believe that. Nothing like taking a myth as real, devoting ones self-worth to it and ignoring anything that demonstrates it is wrong. Considering that those pastors do have biblical evidence for their versions of baptism, etc, how did you decide which version was what God "really meant"? Again, you seem to willfully ignore that your bible is contradicatory and innately can't be "true" through out.

Quote

And I've read 1000s of claims against the Bible. I've also looked into every contradiction I could get my hands on. I heard both sides of the stories (and sometimes I've heard 10 different sides of the stories). Its most fun when all the atheist scholars can't agree on what opinion is fact - and they start fighting each other.

My, goldie has decided that he knows what the "right" answers are. Funny how all Christians feel that way. And please do show where atheist "scholars" can't agree on what "opinion is fact", whatever that means.

Quote

If there's a God he'll give you the info to put the truth together. If there's not? then it'll play itself out in the puzzle pieces. I believe the quest for truth about the Bible is way more freaky than most people could possibly recognise. Anyway...

If there is a god, goldie? You obvious think there is, why the pussyfooting around? IF god will give the truth, who does he give it to? You, as you seem to be indicating? LOL. Again, that's just a Christian attempting to put the blame of not beleing on the human's head, ignoring the lack of evidence for God at all. And "puzzle pieces"? What does that mean? Seems like a wishy-washy Pascal's wager. and oh, the excuse that ooooh, looking for god is magic and special and no one but me can get it right. For a god taht supposedly cares about getting those lost sheep, your god sure does like to play games with humans.

Quote

I believe there are NO contradictions in the Bible. I think God made it a little strange at times. It would be boring if he didn't.

I don't really give a crap on what you "beleive". You can't imagine them away, goldie. Amusing to watch you virtually stick your fingers in your ears like a 9 year old. Your "little strange at times" is no different than a universe without a god. Nice excuse though on why your god sure doesn't seem to exist. Why it's just a game to it! Physical laws, evidence, pshaw, why bother when people like you can make baseless claims about god and be ever-so sure you're right.

Quote

Hate to upset everyone and their boring view of God but; I don't think he wants everyone to easily find the truth, say the magic words and go to heaven. The Bible is tricky enough to allow an evil heart to run its full course. Its fun watching atheists and Muslim's and other false religions stumble all over this book. Its what keeps me a Christian. And i'm not that smart...Just cause something isn't simple to understand - does not make it wrong.

And ah, now goldie has the only right view of God and what God is. Yep, goldie has a pipeline directly to what God thinks and feels. Just like every other Christian. Yep, you think your version of your relgion is the only "true" one and the others are "false" even though you have no more evidence than they. And no you aren't that smart. That's more than obvious and yep, it does probably keep you a Christian, your vain desire to feel superior in that you and only those who agree with you got the "right" answer.

Quote

Next question:Women in the Bible. Women are equal in many areas. Even more equal in some. But God would appreciate it if women would let men be incharge in church. It seems to smooth out a few issues. You can't have two cooks in the kitchen. Someone needs to be incharge. And God would appreciate women being submissive in this area of Worship and teaching. Men have to be submissive in some areas too. Is it really that much to ask? And if they do happen to teach or lead worship: is it the end of the world? NO. Doesn't mean they go straight to hell. Its just a request from God. ITs a deeper issue - but thats the gist of it.

Oh, really? Where in the bible are women "more equal" (all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others - Animal Farm)? And dear, what "issues" are "smoothed out" with women being not in charge in church? why does anyone have to be "in charge" in a church? Where are men submissive in the Bible to women? Hmmm? And god would appreciate? This is great material, goldie, for all of those other Christians who claim that Christians never ever claim to know God. And yes, it is the end of the world if women over step the god rules. We see that again and again in Timothy that it's not "just a request" it's a determination on how things should be. I love how you play make-beleive when your bible is blatantly offensive to modern sensibilities. There goes those fingers in the ears again. Out of curiosity, goldie, what does it take to go to hell in your estimation? Not following the instructions of God? Paul is speaking for God, no one else. Shall we ignore everything in the bible then if it is so haphazard and doesn't really apply?

Quote

I'm pretty sure the end of the Book of Revelation was just referring to the content of John's book.Revelation 22:18"I warn everyone who hears the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them...blah blah blah."

So, why should I agree wtih you and not other Christians?

Quote

Not all the Bible is a prophecy. Some it is just a record of history and thoughts. So it is most likely only referring to Revelation.

and again that magic decoder ring comes out. All of you Christians with decideing what is and isn't prophecy, what is and isn't literal or metaphor and what is or isn't what God "really" meant.

EDIT: I'd say that you simplh don't care about your quotes. It isn't that hard.

Quote

Not magical; just scholastic. Honestly it just seems like the Bible fell into place as a whole. Sure there was a few people with different opinions. but in general most people just agreed and went with it. No huge conspiracy or hidden books. The church organization had very little to gain by the way the Bible came out. If anything it removes the authority of the Bishops and Popes from our lives. (that's why i'm not Catholic.)

Nope, sorry I know better than that. And I'm rather amused that you think you can spew such garbage and it has any chance of being taken seriously. There is nothing to support your ridiculous assertion that the "bible just fell into place". None at all. And there is plenty to oppose it. You are ignorant of the history of your own religion to a pathetic degree.

Quote

I've been reading everything i can about the history of the Bible from A.D. 100 to A.D. 400. Its alot less exciting than most people think. A.D. 367 was an interesting year. As was 393 and 397.

Wel, then you've evidently not been able to read much. If you really had read much, you'd not be so stupid to say what you have. Or, if you really have, you must think no one else has and you can lie about it. I've read quite a bit about it. A couple of good sites on it are: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1985/who-wrote-the-bible-part-1 (five parts in total)

Let's just take the Council of Nicea. After it, those who disagreed with god created by committed were exiled and excommunicated *and* those disagreeing text were ordered burnt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea Not the example of a happy friendly bunch of Christians all agreeing on one thing with no problem as you'd try to have people believe. The churchs had everything to gain on how things came out because that would determine who was in charge and who was on the run.

« Last Edit: January 21, 2011, 04:47:50 PM by velkyn »

Logged

"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

...I don't think he wants everyone to easily find the truth, say the magic words and go to heaven. The Bible is tricky enough to allow an evil heart to run its full course. Its fun watching atheists and Muslim's and other false religions stumble all over this book. Its what keeps me a Christian. And i'm not that smart...

Considering the alternative (or what many xtains believe is the alternative) to heaven, that doesn't seem very nice of God does it? This book is supposed to explain to me, you, Scott Baio, everyone how to get to heaven or at least spend eternity with God. Doesn't seem very logical to make it cryptic or allow it to be edited/changed. Indicates to me that either god doesn't care if I (or anyone) make it to heaven...OR...he doesn't exist and the book was written by a bunch of neckbearded nomads.

Also, are you implying that you do not stumble all over 'this' book? and the fact that the bible doesn't make any sense and isn't in any way applicable to life today is what keeps you a Christian? That is ludicrous.

Quote

Just cause something isn't simple to understand - does not make it wrong.

There is a HUGE difference between a book being difficult to understand and a long, musty book of convoluted, contradictory, nonsensical stories and ramblings.

My thoughts exactly, it seems like such a waste of time beyond a mere exercise in pedantic intellectualism. I view "doctors" of theology with a mixture of sadness, disdain and annoyance. They've studied a fairy tale for eons, and somehow they think it worth while, it baffles me.

To me, bible study is on par with the deepest study of Robin Hood or King Arthur.

Well, to be fair, I enjoy those who are looking at scripture in an attempt to figure out its actual origin, and its intended audience and author. After that, some will get deeper into what the text was most likely to have meant to its intended audience. And those who are looking for its meaning without applying any belief bias.

My thoughts exactly, it seems like such a waste of time beyond a mere exercise in pedantic intellectualism. I view "doctors" of theology with a mixture of sadness, disdain and annoyance. They've studied a fairy tale for eons, and somehow they think it worth while, it baffles me.

To me, bible study is on par with the deepest study of Robin Hood or King Arthur.

Well, to be fair, I enjoy those who are looking at scripture in an attempt to figure out its actual origin, and its intended audience and author. After that, some will get deeper into what the text was most likely to have meant to its intended audience. And those who are looking for its meaning without applying any belief bias.

I agree, there are a few academics that, I dare say, have benefitted the rest of humanity because of their studies. It's when I see some dingbat pastor with a Ph.D. begging for cash that I get ruffled...... It somehow cheapens the qualification of PH.D.......

Logged

rhocam ~ I guess there are several trillion cells in a man, and one in an amoeba, so to be generous, lets say that there were a billion. That is one every fifteen years. So in my lifetime I should have seen two evolutionary changes.

I love random claims of Satan. Hilarious. Your god can't keep its adversary from corrupting the ONLY thing that tells humanity about it. Again, we have idiocy raising its head by claiming that you somehow know what is the satanic bits. Nice decoder ring there.

This is what makes all of Christianity so fun. You guys don't understand God and Satan.

Who says God wants to keep Satan from corrupting his message? That is part of his plan from the very beginning. Didn't you all read Genesis?Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you (Satan) and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring...

Thats a big sentence that explains what's about to happen in the next 2400 pages of the Bible. All of humanity gets divided up between Satan's kids and God's kids. Now watch them play.Why didn't God just erase Satan? I think because there's nothing wrong with a little temptation every now & then. (I could be wrong - sorry God.) Its how we respond to temptations that sorts out the men from the boys. Giving people a choice is a wonderful freedom. Giving them NO choice would be nasty. God uses Satan's existence as a choice. Its up to you?! Heaven and Hell is also a choice. Was Satan made evil? No, he chose to be evil. Even he had a choice. But - the Bible mentions 1000's of times that you are responsible for your choices. And you must pay the price and consequences of your choices. Even Satan has this to look forward to.So to clarify:Satan's children - those that live their life according to his (or your own desires)God's children - those who try to live their life and existence according to Jesus desires. (trying is the best you can do - believe me)

I think God has done an awesome job keeping Satan from corrupting the thing that tells humanity about him. The Bible is awesome. There are millions and millions of Bibles distributed all over the world daily. Pretty good eh?

I do see what the problem is for those trying to find their way into the truth about God. (go along with me on this - just for fun)Their are 1000's of religions, religious books, even Christianity has been divided into the 1000's. And many of them are just plain unbiblical. How does God expect anyone to find the truth? Start with your heart, then quickly add some logic and investigation. God will do the rest. If he doesn't then you can blame him when you stand before him. But i don't think it will turn out in your favour.

Sorry, I don't mean to evangelize. Just putting all my cards on the table - so you know what kind of crazy person your chatting with.

To be fair: you asked me which ones do I THINK we know. Those are the ones I THINK.

You simply listed all of the traditional ascriptions of authorship put forth by Christians over the centuries. Some of these were disputed even within the early church. Many more have been called into question, if not altogether discredited, by modern biblical scholarship. (And not fringe scholarship by a few skeptics, but mainstream scholarship including that of non-fundy Christians.)

The canonical gospels, for example, did not come with their current titles, these were added later. There's no explicit claim to authorship within the texts.

Quote

...In most cases the actual author is not that important. Its all about the content.

That's odd - it strikes me as VERY important to know whether a gospel was written by an eyewitness and disciple of Jesus as claimed, or by an unknown follower writing decades later. Or to know whether a Pauline letter was actually written by Paul, or by someone in the 2nd century who was trying to invoke Paul's authority to advance the agenda of a particular group of Christians. (as in the struggle over women's role in the early church, for example.) One cannot separate the author from the content in such cases - the authorship determines the credibility of the content.

I love random claims of Satan. Hilarious. Your god can't keep its adversary from corrupting the ONLY thing that tells humanity about it. Again, we have idiocy raising its head by claiming that you somehow know what is the satanic bits. Nice decoder ring there.

This is what makes all of Christianity so fun. You guys don't understand God and Satan.

So if we don't, you do? bwaahahaaaa. Love that. I love how Christains all declare that they know all about God and Satan, until they get cornered by their claims.

Quote

Who says God wants to keep Satan from corrupting his message? That is part of his plan from the very beginning. Didn't you all read Genesis?Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you (Satan) and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring...

So, goldie, how is it that Satan can walk with no problem after beign damned to slither on his belly by God? Do God curses wear off? Or is this just a snake we're talkign about and not Satan? You see, Christians can't agree on what in the Bible is literal and what is metaphor so we can never get a straight answer from any of you. And I do love your new claim. Thsi would mean that we can have no idea what in the Bible might be valid at all since your god wants to play games with human souls. What a wreck of a god you've managed to make up. And I don't see anything here saying that the bible is nonsense allowed by God to be mangled. I only see that anyone who does change it will get harmed by God. Heck he even kills a man just for daring to keep his magic box upright. Again, it seems that you need your god to be intentionally deceitful. So much for free will when the omnipotent deity won't allow anyone to see the cards he's holding.

Quote

Thats a big sentence that explains what's about to happen in the next 2400 pages of the Bible. All of humanity gets divided up between Satan's kids and God's kids. Now watch them play.Why didn't God just erase Satan? I think because there's nothing wrong with a little temptation every now & then. (I could be wrong - sorry God.) Its how we respond to temptations that sorts out the men from the boys. Giving people a choice is a wonderful freedom. Giving them NO choice would be nasty. God uses Satan's existence as a choice. Its up to you?! Heaven and Hell is also a choice.

And more and more details on just what God and Satan think! Now we get free will when that magic book doesn't say anyting about it and plenty against it. Heck, goldie will just ignore the bits that he doesn't like. You're getting to be as good as L. Ron Hubbard in creating your own religion!

Quote

Was Satan made evil? No, he chose to be evil. Even he had a choice. But - the Bible mentions 1000's of times that you are responsible for your choices. And you must pay the price and consequences of your choices. Even Satan has this to look forward to.

Again, nothign in the bible about free will, especially with angels. We see a god creates humanity but knows that they will fall and that needs Satan to accomplish that; that needs to sacrifice himself to himself so he can "save" humanity and needs Satan's help in doing that too. So, where does the bible say you are responsible for your choices? We see that children are damned for their parents actions. We see the Pharoah being forced to choice wrongly by God himself. We see in Romans that God picks and chooses who is saved by his whim and intentionally makes some people damned for no better reason than serving as "examples". We also see that people can be damned for being born in the wrong time and place. We also have God having all of the "bad" people killed Revelation and *after* JC rules for an eon over all of the good people who are left, intentionally allows Satan back up. Oh, but of course, we can just ignore those inconvenient parts of the bible since goldie says that God has allowed Satan free reign over his one book that tells anyting about him and we can't be sure that *any* of it is true, except of course what Goldie wants to be true.

Quote

So to clarify:Satan's children - those that live their life according to his (or your own desires)God's children - those who try to live their life and existence according to Jesus desires. (trying is the best you can do - believe me)

And what is this that Jesus desires since we can't really be sure since you've said that Satan has corrupted the book with God's blessing? How can we ever even try to follow JC since you've said we can't know what that really is? OH, we can just listen to you (and every other Christian) who claims to hear directly from God (or it might be Satan, heck there is no way to know!)

Quote

I think God has done an awesome job keeping Satan from corrupting the thing that tells humanity about him. The Bible is awesome. There are millions and millions of Bibles distributed all over the world daily. Pretty good eh?

Kept Satan from corrupting the bible? You've just said that "Who says God wants to keep Satan from corrupting his message? That is part of his plan from the very beginning. " Which is it, goldie? Can't make up your mind?

Quote

I do see what the problem is for those trying to find their way into the truth about God. (go along with me on this - just for fun)Their are 1000's of religions, religious books, even Christianity has been divided into the 1000's. And many of them are just plain unbiblical. How does God expect anyone to find the truth? Start with your heart, then quickly add some logic and investigation. God will do the rest. If he doesn't then you can blame him when you stand before him. But i don't think it will turn out in your favour.

And again, the claims of being "unbiblical". Well, what does it matter if, as you claim, that God has intentionally allowed Satan to corrupt his bible? How can you tell what is "unbiblical" and what isn't? And ah, the claim of start with your "heart" which seems to mean start with goldie's innate hates and desires and then decide that God agrees with you (except for those parts that Satan was allowed to change). I have prayed for God to help me retain my faith while reading the bible. And I got nothing. Your excuse of "well you can complain later" is a classic Christian dodge. Sorry, since I don't beleive in any "after" and even by your bible, that will be too late, it won't do much. And i do love the little threats that you are using now. How expected. Sicne God hasn't done "the rest" and I have no choice, so much again for your claims of free will. i do enjoy seeing you contradict yourself trying to be "right".

Quote

Sorry, I don't mean to evangelize. Just putting all my cards on the table - so you know what kind of crazy person your chatting with.

Not so crazy, just one more Christian making up his religion to suit his own desires.

Logged

"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

This book is supposed to explain to me, you, Scott Baio, everyone how to get to heaven or at least spend eternity with God. Doesn't seem very logical to make it cryptic or allow it to be edited/changed.

Also, are you implying that you do not stumble all over 'this' book? and the fact that the bible doesn't make any sense and isn't in any way applicable to life today is what keeps you a Christian? That is ludicrous.

There is a HUGE difference between a book being difficult to understand and a long, musty book of convoluted, contradictory, nonsensical stories and ramblings.

Wow, You Rock at questions. Thats why I love talking to some of you. Anyway...

I sure hope Scott Baio makes it to heaven. Maybe God won't hold his acting against him. (i'm joking - Happy Days was a huge part of my childhood.) He can drop by my house in heaven anytime.

Is the Bible cryptic? Sometimes. Is there a reason for that? I think so. As the years go on I learn more and more. It shows where my commitment is to learning about God. Do you try to teach a child astrophysics? No, you teach him reading, writing and arithmetic first. The Bible is kind of like that. You can get salvation in a minute.

Luke 23:39-43Thief on the cross: "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus said "truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Simple eh? The rest of the Bible is just so we can explain things to Atheists, Mormons, muslim's, Hindu's etc.

Has the Bible been allowed to be edited/changed? YES and no. We have endless old manuscripts and scrolls to help keep things on track. Every good Bible translator should be aware of and using these resources. And I think they do.Is there corrupt Bibles? Yes, the Jehovah Witnesses have a bible that has been drastically altered. If you are a JW and you just blindly accept this as the truth then that's your problem. At least check into the claims of the scholars for and against this shody workmanship. Then have a look at the organization that supports this New translation. You'll soon see all the problems that pop up as well as their prophetical errors throughout history.

No, I do not stumble all over this book. The problem is I can only learn one thing at a time. Its just like watching a movie. Very soon you realize who the good and bad guys are, and what their goals are. Then just fit the pieces in where they belong. It can be a slow process. But its worth it. That's why I come to you guys. I've run out of questions for the Bible. So I join you all in your questions. Sometimes I don't know the answer so I wait...Or admit God just isn't going to tell us yet. But all the important ones have answers already.

Sorry, bad quoting...you get the idea i'm sure. This is Goldilocks talking now:

Im sure he will stand up to his above comments. When Dr. X says that all the translators who worked on the E.S.V. or KJV of the Bible did a CRAP job - that tells me he can do a BETTER job. If only they had his help, the world would be a better place. Personally i think he is probably full of crap. Or maybe he didn't understand the purpose of these translations. If only we had a Bible that was done by Dr. X. God would be so proud.

At the same time I understand the ability to properly criticize something without actually doing it yourself. Like movie watchers saying a movie they just saw is CRAP. The problem is: your opinion is just an opinion. So Dr. X: when is your NEW Bible translation coming out? Or are you just throwing your opinion around. (which is mostly all I do )

Luke 23:39-43Thief on the cross: "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus said "truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Simple eh? The rest of the Bible is just so we can explain things to Atheists, Mormons, muslim's, Hindu's etc.

In fact, if you had bothered to read it, the passage you quoted is one of the most contentious in Christendom and is the subject of many papers and learned articles. That passage has caused schisms.

Take it in context and see where it is not simple at all. Atheism sees that passage as one of the great proofs that the Resurrection is a lie.

Please - if you are going to pretend to be some sort of bible expert, be careful what you say! In my last post, in another thread, I avoided calling you a "Liar for Christ" but you are making my trust in you look very shaky indeed.

St Augustine warned against Christians giving facile answers that even the common man would know were rubbish. Please listen to his words.

Quote

Saint Augustine (A.D. 354-430) in his work The Literal Meaning of Genesis (De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim) provided excellent advice for all Christians who are faced with the task of interpreting Scripture in the light of scientific knowledge. This translation is by J. H. Taylor in Ancient Christian Writers, Newman Press, 1982, volume 41.

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?

Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]

Logged

Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Goldielocks, you have made accusations against Doctor X and failed to back them up. You have also failed to learn how to use quotes properly. Please address both of these issues promptly. If you fail to do so, you are likely to end up being confined to the "Emergency Room" section of the forum to resolve the difficulty. Thank you.

Logged

[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]: Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

I admit, I don't see that you've been a liar. But, your most recent posts have been more emotion than reasoned response to some of the items that Graybeard and Doctor X have written.

So, for instance, a recent post of yours declares your disbelief and shows your appeal to a different authority. My question to you (from a discussion point of view) is: so what? Just because you fail to believe that Doctor X could possibly be right, because you put more weight in the authority of other translators, doesn't mean that your feeling about that holds water.

A feeling doesn't matter much in translations, or in discussions about translations. A feeling is not substantial when we are speaking about accuracy. If this continues, at the very least this line of conversation will go very sour. You have to give specific counter examples, and qualify yourself.

If the subject matter is beyond your ability to respond to at the moment, feel free to take a breather. Ask friends who might have helpful tidbits, as a friend who might be a scholar. Read up some more. It's ok. You won't lose face. Doctor X and Graybeard do research on it... you can too. If I were discussing it, I'd have to take a while to research an argument against them.

That, and work on your quotes. There are enough forums out there that use these same features, so that it might be handy to know how to use them. Go into the test area, and make some test posts to practice.

Dr. X claims to be a better Bible translator than all the people who have been in the industry for many decades.

LIE.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

--J.D.

There has been enough anger on the forums recently, and although you may not be angry, chasing this down might just precipitate more bad mojo. For the sake of this thread, can we consider that remark an ill-chosen mis-statement? Would you accept a rough translation of it as: "Doc X thinks he's so high-falutin' and thinks he knows his Bible, that heathen scum. How could he possibly know it better than Jesus-certified translators?" <-- it hits all the major points, despite my poor language skills.

That way, we don't get sidetracked with outright lies, slander, libel, and such. We can get back to the business of him proving you wrong, and you proving him wrong.

I have yet to call you a liar, but you're certainly putting words in Doc's mouth whether it is intentional or not.

(Crap)King James Version + ESV ? I can translate it better

• Just because I say this lobster bisque is shit doesn't mean I think I can cook a better bisque.• Just because X says this translation is shit doesn't mean he thinks he can translate a better bible.

At this point I'm just curious to see if you're willing to admit you were wrong.

But to get back on topic, I don't find the NIV translation to be reliable and mainly due to this exerpt: "While it may be that at times the NIV translators have been guilty of reading something into the text, I would contend that overall this version has achieved a high level of accuracy by its philosophy of translation."[1]

The individual made a very specific claim on my part which Unsuspecting Members of the Noble Readership might read as accurate. I would "accept" a Retraction, and Apology--"Humbly, Harith! Humbly!"--and forgo his transport in irons to the colonies.

Otherwise, I see no reason to pay further attention to a poster who would so willfully Lie--other than to deliver the occasional sound thrashing as an example to the rest of the Great Unwashed.

Okay, apparently I hurt some peoples feelings around here. Was I being emotional? I don't think so. I was just calling you out.

Are you saying Dr. X that you did not call the ESV Bible translation: CRAP. ?????????

Maybe i'm wrong. I even grabbed your post from our other discussion to prove this. I was hoping you would explain yourself in great detail. Its perfectly okay to call the Book I love crap. You have every right to your opinion. I was just hoping you would back up your opinion with some well thought out insights. Did I not say this in my first few posts here? I believe I did.

In order for you to fairly call one version of the Bible (ESV translation: CRAP) and another version of the Bible (RSV translation) much better, i would like you to explain yourself. I compared some of my favourite sections from those 2 translations - and guess what? They were almost identical. Word for word.

Some i'm very curious about how you came to this conclusion of yours. I have no experience in the world of Bible translations - other than reading a whole bunch of them. I have read numerous write-ups from the people who put together the ESV Bible, and they explain their work and mission statement very clearly.

You claim to have the education to declare their years of Bible translation officially crap. I'm curious why.

Why is this so FREAKIN' difficult. Just answer my question. Many people here think you are some kind of Bible Guru.

If we are just talking about movies or music and you declare something crap - then that's okay. Your opinion is valid. But you say you are educated in translation and that i should believe your opinion in this area. You haven't even begun to prove yourself to me. So lets have it. Did these scholars and translators make bad word choices? Bad sentence structure? That's all i'm asking.

I'm NOT an expert. please teach me something. I believe I've said that already.

Many cults and religions inform their believer's NOT to question some things. Christianity and the Bible says "Bring it on. We like a challenge."

Oh, really?

Quote

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

--Galatians 1:8

Quote

Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

--Romans 9:20-21

When it comes to the notion of the Bible (especially the New Testament) as the "infallible Word of God," I wonder why Christians think their god would want to use such an awkward and error-prone process as "oral tradition, followed by copying, re-copying, re-re-copying, translating, re-translating, and re-re-translating texts so that a whole scholarly discipline of textual criticism is necessary to try to figure out what the originals said" instead of simply having Jesus carve what he wanted said in stone, like [CLICKY--->] Diogenes of Oenoanda did? Why should Diogenes, or, for that matter, Ramses II with his account of the Battle of Kadesh, be able to do a better job of preserving his words than Almighty God, when the words have to do with the eternal fate of his supposedly beloved human children?

I always get a kick out of the way Protestants saw off the limb they're sitting on. "The Bible" didn't just float down from the sky one day to a soundtrack of angelic choirs. Its contents were debated on, haggled over, and voted in or out by...

...wait for it...

...the Catholic Church, in Church Councils under the auspices of several late Roman Emperors. Since Protestants reject the authority and Apostolic Succession of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, they reject the very authority which conferred "canonical" status on "the Bible!" A consistent Protestant who really believed in "the priesthood of all believers" would have to revisit the issue of "canonization" of Scripture and decide for herself or himself (while acknowledging the right of all other Protestants to do likewise) which books qualified as "Scripture." Of course, we never see them doing this, because they want to have their Catholic cake and eat it too, using a Roman Catholic creation as a paper Pope they can wield to give themselves access to perceived infallibility. "The WORD O' GAWWWWD says..."

This is what makes all of Christianity so fun. You guys don't understand God and Satan.

Who says God wants to keep Satan from corrupting his message? That is part of his plan from the very beginning. Didn't you all read Genesis?Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you (Satan) and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring...

Thats a big sentence that explains what's about to happen in the next 2400 pages of the Bible. All of humanity gets divided up between Satan's kids and God's kids. Now watch them play.

Well, OK then. So God and Satan are like a couple little boys with magnifying glasses and an ant farm. Note the collegial relationship between them in the Book of Job, and the way they're used interchangeably in parallel passages about David's census of Israel and the murder of 70,000 people as "punishment."

It's OK if you want to worship a malevolent Trickster god, I suppose. Him and his little buddy Satan playing around with people's minds, torturing them eternally when they fail to outsmart omniscience... People worshiped Zeus, and he was a right bastard a lot of the time. But what gets my goat is when Christians explain the little God-and-Satan Game, then go on and try to tell me that their god is pure and perfect and 100% good in every imaginable way. No. Sorry. You can have your amoral Trickster/Cthulhu-god whose ways are incomprehensible and who will return to Godzilla-stomp people by the millions when the stars are right, or whatever. Or you can have your neo-Platonic abstraction of a pure, perfect Prime Mover god who is the Form and Ground of the True, the Beautiful, and the Good. But you can't have both at the same time and in the same respect. Especially if you want to simultaneously claim that your god is logical, or worse, the source of logic. The Law of Non-Contradiction bites you in the ass on that one.

« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 06:12:22 AM by kcrady »

Logged

"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

Well, OK then. So God and Satan are like a couple little boys with magnifying glasses and an ant farm. Note the collegial relationship between them in the Book of Job, and the way they're used interchangeably in parallel passages about David's census of Israel and the murder of 70,000 people as "punishment."

Interestingly, notice the change from the Deuteronomistic version--where YHWH orders the census . . . in order to squish David--YHWH is a king . . . kings do what they want . . . you do not take censuses and tax the wonderful Priests who are writing the Deuteronomistic History. Even if you think YHWH is telling you to do so:

Quote

2 Sam 24:1-10 Again the anger of YHWH was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go, number Israel and Judah." So the king said to Jo'ab and the commanders of the army, who were with him, "Go through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan to Beer-sheba, and number the people, that I may know the number of the people." But Jo'ab said to the king, "May YHWH your god add to the people a hundred times as many as they are, while the eyes of my lord the king still see it; but why does my lord the king delight in this thing?" But the king's word prevailed against Jo'ab and the commanders of the army. So Jo'ab and the commanders of the army went out from the presence of the king to number the people of Israel. They crossed the Jordan, and began from Aro'er, and from the city that is in the middle of the valley, toward Gad and on to Jazer. Then they came to Gilead, and to Kadesh in the land of the Hittites; and they came to Dan, and from Dan they went around to Sidon, and came to the fortress of Tyre and to all the cities of the Hivites and Canaanites; and they went out to the Negeb of Judah at Beer-sheba. So when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days. And Jo'ab gave the sum of the numbering of the people to the king: in Israel there were eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand. But David's heart smote him after he had numbered the people. And David said to YHWH, "I have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now, O YHWH, I pray thee, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly."

Move an Exile to rebuilding/building? the Temple . . . to the Chronicles. David is not a bastard, Solomon is a swell-guy who does not "love foreign women" like he did in the Deuteronomistic History. Sort of inconvenient to have a god that demands you do something so he can punish you for doing it.

So the Chronicler digs up a character. In fact, he is our earliest representative of "Satan"--??n--???--[All they can see is question marks!--Ed.] as a proper noun--a name. Before, it is always "a satan" or "the satan" and refers not only to a member of the Heavenly Council of the "sons of the gods"--as in Job and Zechariah--but David refers to himself as a "satan" in 2 Samuel 19:23. The Chronicler has to keep the story since it reveals the location where the Second/First? Temple should be built. Thus:

Quote

1 Chron 21: 1-7 Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel. So David said to Jo'ab and the commanders of the army, "Go, number Israel, from Beer-sheba to Dan, and bring me a report, that I may know their number." But Jo'ab said, "May YHWH add to his people a hundred times as many as they are! Are they not, my lord the king, all of them my lord's servants? Why then should my lord require this? Why should he bring guilt upon Israel?" But the king's word prevailed against Jo'ab. So Jo'ab departed and went throughout all Israel, and came back to Jerusalem. And Jo'ab gave the sum of the numbering of the people to David. In all Israel there were one million one hundred thousand men who drew the sword, and in Judah four hundred and seventy thousand who drew the sword. But he did not include Levi and Benjamin in the numbering, for the king's command was abhorrent to Jo'ab. But God [Ha Elohim—Ed.] was displeased with this thing, and he smote Israel.

As Forsyth notes:

Quote

Given the Chronicler’s pro-Persian stance and his political moderation, a revolution that is so compelling and dangerous is that last thing to which he would want to call his reader’s attention, and still less the ruthless methods provoked by that civil war among members of the holy family. But there was one sin of David’s that could not be passed over: the taking of a census. This episode could not be avoided, because its aftermath was the revelation of the site on which the temple was to be built, (Forsyth).